It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Airport screeners must avoid breast area on women!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Well I guess that it is official then, the threat of terrorism isn't really that bad. This is just stupid. It can only mean one of two things, either there is no real threat of terrorism or authorities don't mind the odd one slipping through.




posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 07:04 AM
link   
I don't know can I have a representative squeeze your buttocks, your breast (or balls - if you're male) & stick their finger in your rectum & vagina first just to make sure your not the last terrorist hiding something in there Kriz_4?

Also, would you mind if I get copy of your DNA sample, look at your family tree, get a copy of your brainscan display for the section that asked whether or not you liked you country, have you ever broken the law, do you have any present or past associates who have broken the law, have you ever had thoughts of breaking the law, have you ever cheated on your wife or girlfriend, have you ever cheated on an exam, have you ever been arrested, have you ever used drugs, have you ever been drunk, have you ever lied to an employer, have you ever lied to the IRS or any government agency, have you ever looked at someone of your gender sexually, have you ever looked at a person under 18 sexually since you've been over 18, Do you think you could ever become a terrorist?


[edit on 24-12-2004 by outsider]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Not too sure what you are going on about, if I am honest. I have had my sensitive area searched before when entering clubs, doesn't bother me. They are talking about searching around the breast area, big deal. How many women have been for breast examnations at the docors, plenty. So, because a few women fear having an area around the breat area searched, we should leave that avenue open to terrorists? So, is it just Arab or Muslim women that should have their breast area searched? I mean, only searching if they look like they may be carrying explosives or may be a terorist, how does that work?


stick their finger in your rectum & vagina first just to make sure your not the last terrorist hiding something in there Kriz_4?


What are you going on about?

Actually, the US has my finger prints, photo, family members information. Had to give that last time I went. They also ask(very dumb) questions on forms you fill in on entering the country.

Such as: Have you ever commited crime, do you intend to commit crime? Are you affiliated with any terrorist groups or been involved in terrorist activity? (dumb question or what). I believe they also used to ask if you were gay, like that even matters.

[edit on 24-12-2004 by Kriz_4]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 07:22 AM
link   
We are going to get to this stage, no worries about it. Just a matter of time.

Nothing wrong about fingerprints, nor about accessing personal files (about previous violence, etc), a criminal has to live with that. There will be a machine analizing fingerprints, and a database showing where you are from, and are you a suspected terrorist/criminal. It works in many police care already...



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 07:40 AM
link   
I was responding to your sarcasm by being sarcastic. What I'm getting at is there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and that's where the line has been drawn.



Originally posted by Kriz_4

What are you going on about?



My analogy is this, do we want to start treating regular citizens like we treat convicted criminals? Terrorist are as determined to hide there contraband just as much as a convicted dope addict in a prison - the farther we go in searching people the more desperate measures terrorist will take. Thus unless we plan to allow every kind of search we do on convicts - you wont be any safer.

In our prison system they have determined that many of the drugs & money to buy them are smuggled in from visitors - no matter how hard they search them they get in. So, in order to reduce the amount of drugs coming in after the convicts leave the visit area they have to strip naked and then guards perform body cavity searches of prisoners to see if their carrying any contraband.


Originally posted by Kriz_4
They also ask(very dumb) questions on forms you fill in on entering the country.Such as: Have you ever commited crime, do you intend to commit crime? Are you affiliated with any terrorist groups or been involved in terrorist activity? (dumb question or what). I believe they also used to ask if you were gay, like that even matters.


Yes, and very soon there will be brainscans widely available that will show a live picture of brainfuntion and they can ask those questions and watch your brain process on a video screen and determine what your thinking at that time. Yes, it's the thought police - and it's heading our way, but that's another subject for another thread.

A private club can do whatever they like within the law and it's up to the customers whether or not they wish to subject themselves to that type of search in order to use the services of that club. If you don't like that search you have the option of going to another club. Unless your quite wealthy, you don't have the option of hiring a private jet and bypassing that security. I don't believe going to privately owned club is as fundamental as the freedom of movement that we've come to expect in a free country and the airports are managed by a government agency - We give them power in order to protect us, not to hold over us. Power can be intoxicating and it's our job to keep them from becoming to intoxicated by that power.

You do make one good point. Maybe if they do need to search someones private area in circumstances such as multiple failed scans - they should have an educated medical professional to do the job and not someone they just hired & trained off the street 6 months ago. Still do we all need to be checked by government doctors every to we decide to visit mom, or take a business trip just to make sure were in compliance. Are we going to make freedom of movement throughout our country so expensive & invasive that we cease to be free?


[edit on 24-12-2004 by outsider]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by outsider
A private club can do whatever they like within the law and it's up to the customers whether or not they wish to subject themselves to that type of search in order to use the services of that club. If you don't like that search you have the option of going to another club. Unless your quite wealthy, you don't have the option of hiring a private jet and bypassing that security. I don't believe going to privately owned club is as fundamental as the freedom of movement that we've come to expect in a free country and the airports are managed by a government agency - We give them power in order to protect us, not to hold over us & power can be intoxicating it's our job to keep them from becoming to intoxicated by that power.
[edit on 24-12-2004 by outsider]


I strongly believe, that the customers of the airlines DO understand this problem, and also that this protection against terrorists is just among the first steps ahead. Technology is on its way to advance, and the screening will be more comfortable and privacy win't be violated, as technology evolves.

I really think, that patting is among the very last solutions, eg: if a customer is suspicious, or if there is great danger on that particular day.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:27 AM
link   
I am a woman and travel on business several times a week and this issue is not about limiting the ability to legitimately search for weapons--this is about rogue TSA agents that use the latitude in the law to molest women and to subject people to unnecessary searches.

I have had several experiences were I was called out of line, not because I set the metal detector off or because I was wearing bulky clothing, and was literally felt up. Being that I wear a suit when I travel, and have to take off my jacket when walking through the metal detectors, there is no way that anyone could think that there was anything hidden under the thin, usually semi-transparent shell that I am wearing underneath.

In the most egregious instance--with a male screener at Mitchell Airfield in Wisconsin, while alledgedly trying to feel for the underwire for my bra (and this guy wasn't exactly feeling in the right place as he was groping the top of my breasts), he made a comment under his breath about how he "loves his job." The other male screeners were watching and grinning, and it was obvious that I wasn't pulled aside because they thought that I was a terrorist. When I stepped back away from his hands, he said in a sing-song voice that resisting a search would result in arrest. I walked away anyway, and big surprise, I wasn't arrested.

There was another instance in St. Louis a female screener pulled me out--again the detector didn't go off and neither did the wand detector. However, she then proceeded to search for my underwire and she asked me to unbutton my silk blouse. The blouse was practically see-through to begin with, and it was form-fitting, so I don't know what she could have possibly thought was hiding underneath it. I told her that I didn't have anything on underneath but my bra, so she led me behind a screen and had me unbutton my shirt so she could "check" my bra and feel the "underwire." Well, in doing so she felt me up--she touched my breasts when she could just look at my bra. It was absolutely unnecessary as she could have felt the underwire over my blouse--there was no reason for her to touch me.

And I have seen women of all ages stripping down to their bras in the airport--if you don't ask for privacy, they don't lead you to the private screening area. And it isn't just young women, sometimes it is older women that are being screened as well. The other day I was at O'Hare and saw an elderly woman who was literally moaning in pain as she was being held up out of her wheelchair by two TSA agents while another screener was feeling her hips and for her bra. Isn't this overkill? Did they honestly believe that this disabled 80-something year old woman had a weapon in her underpants?

I do believe that it is necessary to search passengers prior to boarding the plane and I don't mind taking off my shoes, jacket, sweater, and if I was wearing bulky or unusually shaped clothing, I would understand the need for a manual search. The issue is that some of the TSA agents are unprofessional and instead of being on the lookout for terrorists, they are getting there kicks feeling up women or going above and beyond what is necessary. Unfortunately, they are able to get away with it because they are in a position of authority and most people at the airport are too rushed to complain.

In typical government fashion, instead of weeding out the miscreants at the TSA and instituting proper training, they are issuing edicts that will probably make us less safe. I don't think that the problem is with the concept of a female terrorist smuggling a weapon on the plane in her bra, the problem is with the TSA employees that are inappropriately feeling up women who clearly shouldn't be searched--why can't they hire people for this very important position that are professional and that can understand who should be searched? I am sure that if women had guidelines to follow--such as their breasts would only be searched if they were wearing bulky clothing and the metal detector wand was set off, there would be much more understanding regarding this rule, but this is not the case today.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by outsider
Kriz_4,

I was responding to your sarcasm by being sarcastic. What I'm getting at is there has to be a line drawn somewhere, and that's where the line has been drawn.
[edit on 24-12-2004 by outsider]


Ah, my apologies, it is sometimes very hard to tell if people are being sarcastic or serious on this message board.

I agree, a line has to be drawn somewhere. I still do feel that these searches are perfectley reasonable after previous incidents.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:44 AM
link   
lmgnyc, the case you state at the beginning about the man whose colleagues were grinning, I hope you reported them. People who are more interested in getting a free feel than looking for suspicious objects are not the right people for the job.

As for being taken aside to a private place to remove your shirt, I thiink that is reasonable in most cases.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by lmgnyc
In the most egregious instance--with a male screener at Mitchell Airfield in Wisconsin, while alledgedly trying to feel for the underwire for my bra (and this guy wasn't exactly feeling in the right place as he was groping the top of my breasts), he made a comment under his breath about how he "loves his job." The other male screeners were watching and grinning, and it was obvious that I wasn't pulled aside because they thought that I was a terrorist. When I stepped back away from his hands, he said in a sing-song voice that resisting a search would result in arrest. I walked away anyway, and big surprise, I wasn't arrested.


You can ask for a female do that to you, can't you? I don't think, that a male has to touch you, anyway. I have seen reports of this, it's not like "you either accept it or don't fly", it is also possible to complain to higher command.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 09:27 AM
link   
lmgnyc,

Thanks for your addition to this thread. It's nice hearing from a female who's experienced this abuse and is very articulate at explaining it.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by outsider
We put up with enough crap to fly already - touching private areas is out of bounds for free people.

Let me guess you are a member of the ACLU right? The new procedure put in place did not actually touch they women who did the searching of ladies used the PALM of their hands to trace the outline of the breast with the new procedures put in place. There was no gropping.

www.msnbc.msn.com...
You know what they say a picture is worth a thousand words


[quote]First of all the cockpit doors have been dead bolted, so the issue is not a weapon - duh.


The issue sure is a weapon, it is called a bomb, you know something that would never have to get into the cockpit to kill you.


If your afraid of terrorist why don't you walk.



I prefer flying myself and want everyone even myself to be searched as many times as necessary. Kindly note in the survey they posted the majority of the results were for searching in that way. Last check yesterday was 85% however the survey results are no longer available.

If you think there too much invasion of privacy might I suggest you drive.






*Fixed Quote Tag

[edit on 24-12-2004 by TrickmastertricK]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
The issue sure is a weapon, it is called a bomb, you know something that would never have to get into the cockpit to kill you.


Sure, that's right. Even if terrorists can't get into a cockpit, doesn't mean that a bomb cannot hold danger. Blowing up a jumbo plane over a major city could be equivalent to a 911 attack.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 10:16 AM
link   

And I have seen women of all ages stripping down to their bras in the airport--if you don't ask for privacy, they don't lead you to the private screening area. [/quote/

I find that very hard to believe. I am sure if that had been the case hundreds of people would have spoken out against it and those would not have been just women alone. Amazing no reporters ever saw this either, I am sure they would have had a feeding frinzey on something like that. If I had seen something like that take place I would have complained big time and I am male.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 10:45 AM
link   
However, this could be true but only if those particular women are actually suspects. In this case, privacy means nothing!



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 11:08 AM
link   
You have to ask... where do you draw the line? And at some point "security" isn't a valid excuse to violate a person's privacy. If security is such a great concern then why not just require a strip search and a bcs? I mean someone could hide something somewhere and what if they used that to bring a plane down? This is the mentality of our government and society. Crap happens. If you can't deal with life then don't leave your house. Its safer at home. Unless of course you fear indoor pollutants as well.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Good question! These guards can learn many ways to pinpoint potential suspects, including terrorists. They can see your unusual behaviour, just ready to die. That is a major clue to strip you right away.

But as privacy is still a major factor, the airports will actually face interesting impacts against law, and the law will draw that line. The airport leadership just cannot know everything.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vertu

You can ask for a female do that to you, can't you? I don't think, that a male has to touch you, anyway. I have seen reports of this, it's not like "you either accept it or don't fly", it is also possible to complain to higher command.


My experience with requesting special treatment personally or witnessing others traveling with me or around me ask for special treatment is that it is usually first met with a rebuke from the screener (typically along the lines of "That isn't necessary." or "Can't you see that the line is so long?") and when you ask again, that usually means that you are in for some kind of ordeal because you have pissed them off. Sometimes made to wait an inordinate amount of time for a private screening area or a female screener. Sometimes it means that you have to walk to a different security area, which could be far away. And in smaller airports, sometimes female screeners are not available depending on the time of day. I typically just let it go because I don't have time to walk all over the terminal or don't want to get into an argument with the screener.

It is funny because in many cases, there are signs posted everywhere saying that you can ask for privacy or a manual search of your bags, but there should also be warnings on the signs that say that you should ask for these things at the detriment of missing your flight or being subject to an argument with the screener.

And, yes, you can complain--and I have complained, but again, it usually takes inordinate amounts of time. Once you say that you want to speak to a supervisor, you either have to wait until one is available and other times you have to go to the specially designated place in the terminal to complain. Who the heck has time for that or wants to lug their carry-on all over the place--sometimes to another building to wait yet again. Unfortunately, in the situation where I was molested in Wisconsin, I had to catch a flight and didn't have the time to report the screener. Also, with all of the guards in cohoots, it didn't seem likely that I would get to a supervisor without a fight anyway.

I fly pretty often and I am getting the distinct impression that the TSA deliberately makes examples out of people who complain or who go against "the program." I've seen people treated harshly for no good reason--sometimes just for asking questions. They certainly can make your life miserable and make you miss your flight if you question or annoy them.

And it can certainly be a situation where it is "you either accept it or don't fly." I have witnessed a situation where a TSA agent subject an entire family--two adults and two children under 7--to a manual search of their bodies and carry on bags, causing them to miss their flight. These people were on line in front of me and I was talking with them--they weren't hotheads or antagonistic. After a two hour wait to check their bags due to a United computer system malfunction, and then over an hour wait to get to security, this agent started in on the parents when they couldn't get the children's clear plastic sandals off quickly enough. It was totally uncalled for. When the father asked a simple question, in a very nice way--"Is this necessary?"--a valid question given the fact that the sandals were clear, plastic, and on the feet of a young child, the guard pulled the whole family off the line. When the father protested that they were going to miss their flight as it left in fifteen minutes, and the agent said that they should have thought of that before talking back to him. I know they missed the flight because I was on the same plane and they never got on it. The TSA can make your trip hell if they feel like it.

And its not every agent--I'm sure that some are nice people. But there are many that are power-crazed jerks, so you are better off just keeping your mouth shut if the ordeal that they subject you too isn't going to scar you for life. Because most people who are flying have to be in a certain place at a certain time and don't have the option of missing their flight, it is better to not make waves with these people.

Is this the right way to handle security? Absolutely not. I feel like cattle when I fly and the airport is like a police state. It doesn't have to be that way. Of course, when I upgrade to business/first class, the experience is completely different. You usually have a seperate line and screeners are much nicer--they never touch you or ask you to remove any clothing. But that logic is ridiculous--a terrorist can just as easily purchase a more expensive ticket.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I don't understand their culture over there, I think that the whole situation will normalize by time. There are high-end people from the Power Elite, who keep travelling by commercial jetliners, but a single word from them can change everything, because they have the power to do that. Now i think, that these people won't let them stripped off, and they will be the key for new solutions!



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   


I think it is ridiculous that they are changing this because a couple hundred people complain about the manner in which they are being screened.


Seems like you're not part of this "couple of hundred" people who complain about the manner, as well as you're obviously not a WOMEN. Ridiculous? You are ridiculous indeed thinking that today's womens will accept their breast being seen in each and every airport in America just because some paranoid retard in Washington has just realized that the world is full of dangers and that all american citizens are potential terrorists!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join